Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W69420123> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 67 of
67
with 100 items per page.
- W69420123 abstract "Lower federal courts often cite the “political question doctrine” when dismissing as nonjusticiable individual rights cases arising in the context of foreign or military affairs, especially since the 1962 case of Baker v. Carr. Similarly, such courts have inappropriately begun citing “special factors” counselling hesitation in refusing to recognize constitutional claims (“Bivens claims”) in similar foreign policy contexts. However, a review of 200 years of history reveals that the Supreme Court has never applied the so-called “political question doctrine” as a truly nonjusticiable doctrine to dismiss individual rights claims, even those arising in the context of foreign or military affairs. In fact, the Supreme Court has almost always rejected the “political question doctrine” as a basis to preclude adjudication of individual rights claims, even in the context of foreign or military affairs. Although the Supreme Court has invoked a “political question doctrine” in some cases, a close review of those cases demonstrates that rather than dismissing the cases as “nonjusticiable,” the Court in fact adjudicated the case by finding that either the executive or Congress acted constitutionally within their power or discretion. The recent post-9/11 Supreme Court cases of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Rasul v. Bush, and Bush v. Boumediene further demonstrate that the doctrine does not exist as a nonjusticiability doctrine in individual rights claims (if it exists as such at all), even in those involving foreign and military affairs. In case there remained any doubt, in 2012 case of Zivotofsky v. Clinton, the Supreme Court for all practical purposes sounded the death knell of the application of the “political question doctrine” as a nonjusticiability doctrine with regard to individual rights claims, including those arising in a foreign policy context. Rather than continuing to dismiss such cases on political question grounds or using “special factors” inappropriately as a nonjusticiable doctrine, federal courts should adjudicate the claims by ruling which branch has what power under the Constitution, and whether the branch acted within its powers. This is an important function of the courts, and one vital to legal and political transparency and democracy. Indeed, this is the approach the Supreme Court has consistently taken – even if the Court has not always well-articulated this approach – and which it affirmed in Zivotofsky." @default.
- W69420123 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W69420123 creator A5065516410 @default.
- W69420123 date "2014-05-28" @default.
- W69420123 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
- W69420123 title "Misunderstood, Misconstrued, and Now Clearly Dead: The 'Political Question Doctrine' as a Justiciability Doctrine" @default.
- W69420123 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
- W69420123 type Work @default.
- W69420123 sameAs 69420123 @default.
- W69420123 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W69420123 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
- W69420123 hasAuthorship W69420123A5065516410 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C13010478 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C204434341 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C2779343474 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C2779518780 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C38671928 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C48764862 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C93377909 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
- W69420123 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C13010478 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C166957645 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C17744445 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C199539241 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C204434341 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C2776211767 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C2778272461 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C2779343474 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C2779518780 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C38671928 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C48764862 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C93377909 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C94625758 @default.
- W69420123 hasConceptScore W69420123C95457728 @default.
- W69420123 hasLocation W694201231 @default.
- W69420123 hasOpenAccess W69420123 @default.
- W69420123 hasPrimaryLocation W694201231 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W1552268399 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W2036840919 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W2179647680 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W2184336694 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W244379235 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W252592075 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W262836850 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W276290102 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W281723904 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3121313475 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3121446480 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3122604784 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3123667294 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3123750909 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3125868734 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3185815815 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3206710151 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3122382400 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3124110134 @default.
- W69420123 hasRelatedWork W3125656750 @default.
- W69420123 isParatext "false" @default.
- W69420123 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W69420123 magId "69420123" @default.
- W69420123 workType "article" @default.